Patent Grant
8938594
Typical computer systems include a file system for storing and accessing files. In addition to storing system files (operating system files, device driver files, etc.), the file system provides storage and access of user data files. If any of these files (system files and/or user files) contain critical data, then it becomes advantageous to employ a data backup scheme to ensure that critical data are not lost if a file storage device fails. One data backup scheme that is commonly employed is mirroring. Mirroring involves maintaining two or more copies of a file, where each copy of the file is located on a separate file storage device (e.g., a local hard disk, a networked hard disk, a network file server, etc.).
When one or more file storage devices fails for any length of time, the file storage device(s) may become unsynchronized. However, when employing a mirroring scheme, it is of critical importance to ensure that the mirrors are synchronized (i.e., that the contents of each mirror are the same). If a mirror becomes unsynchronized, the simplest recovery scheme involves copying all of the data from a synchronized mirror to the unsynchronized mirror. However, copying all data from one file storage device to another file storage device may take a long time and reduce performance of the file storage devices significantly during the resynchronization process.
Alternatively, dirty region logging (DRL) may be used to facilitate resynchronization. DRL involves dividing each mirror into a number of “regions.” Depending on the implementation, the region may be as small as a single disk sector or larger than 256 kilobytes (KB). Prior to modifying the content of a region—for example, when there is a write operation on data within the region—a DRL entry for the region is created in the DRL. In most cases, the DRL entry merely identifies the region where the modification will be attempted. If the region is modified successfully, then the DRL entry is cleared. If the region is not modified successfully, then the DRL entry remains in the DRL. Thus, during a resynchronization process, the DRL may be used to identify which specific regions require resynchronization, rather than resynchronizing the entire file storage device.
Dirty region logging may be more time-efficient then resynchronizing an entire file storage device. However, it also includes system overhead with each modification to a region, since the DRL must be updated prior to each modification to the region. Clearly, this overhead increases with smaller region sizes. Conversely, if the regions are large, there may be significant overhead involved in resynchronizing an entire region, even though only a single disk sector in that region may have been modified.
In general, in one aspect, the invention relates to a method for resilvering a storage pool. The method comprises determining whether any of a first plurality of blocks in the storage pool, comprising metadata, require resilvering, determining whether any of a second plurality of blocks in the storage pool, comprising data, require resilvering, resilvering all of the first plurality of blocks that require resilvering, and resilvering all of the second plurality of blocks that require resilvering, wherein all of the first plurality of blocks that require resilvering are resilvered prior to resilvering any of the second plurality of blocks.
In general, in one aspect, the invention relates to a system. The system comprises a storage pool, a first plurality of blocks in the storage pool, comprising metadata, a second plurality of blocks in the storage pool, comprising data, and a file system. The file system is configured to determine whether any of the first plurality of blocks require resilvering, determine whether any of the second plurality of blocks require resilvering, resilver all of the first plurality of blocks that require resilvering, and resilver all of the second plurality of blocks that require resilvering, wherein all of the first plurality of blocks that require resilvering are resilvered prior to resilvering any of the second plurality of blocks.
Other aspects of the invention will be apparent from the following description and the appended claims.
Specific embodiments of the invention will now be described in detail with reference to the accompanying figures. Like elements in the various figures are denoted by like reference numerals for consistency.
In the following detailed description of embodiments of the invention, numerous specific details are set forth in order to provide a more thorough understanding of the invention. However, it will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art that the invention may be practiced without these specific details. In other instances, well-known features have not been described in detail to avoid unnecessarily complicating the description.
In general, embodiments of the invention provide a method and system to resilver a storage pool. Specifically, embodiments of the invention relate to resilvering a storage pool using a top-down approach; i.e., a parent block is resilvered before its child blocks are resilvered. More specifically, embodiments of the invention relate to resilvering blocks containing metadata before resilvering blocks containing data.
The operating system (103) typically interfaces with the file system (100) via a system call interface (102). The operating system (103) provides operations (101) for users to access files within the file system (100). These operations (101) may include read, write, open, close, etc. In one embodiment of the invention, the file system (100) is an object-based file system (i.e., both data and metadata are stored as objects). More specifically, the file system (100) includes functionality to store both data and corresponding metadata in the storage pool (108). Thus, the aforementioned operations (101) provided by the operating system (103) correspond to operations on objects.
More specifically, in one embodiment of the invention, a request to perform a particular operation (101) (i.e., a transaction) is forwarded from the operating system (103), via the system call interface (102), to the DMU (104). In one embodiment of the invention, the DMU (104) translates the request to perform an operation on an object directly to a request to perform a read or write operation at a physical location within the storage pool (108). More specifically, the DMU (104) represents the objects as data blocks and indirect blocks as described in
In one embodiment of the invention, the storage pool (108) includes one or more physical disks (disks (110A, 110N)). Further, in one embodiment of the invention, the storage capacity of the storage pool (108) may increase and decrease dynamically as physical disks are added and removed from the storage pool (108). In one embodiment of the invention, the storage space available in the storage pool (108) is managed by the SPA (106).
As shown in
As an alternative to storing the actual time that the disk (e.g., 110A, 110N) was offline, each I/O request issued to the storage pool (108) may be associated with a transaction group number. Thus, instead of storing the actual time the disk (e.g., 110A, 110N) was offline, the DTL (e.g., 115A, 115N) may store the transaction group number(s) during which the disk (e.g., 110A, 110N) was offline. More specifically, the DTL (e.g., 115A, 115N) may store the transaction group number(s) during which I/O requests were not successfully completed for the disk (e.g., 110A, 110N). Accordingly, the use of “birth time” in the following descriptions may refer to either a time or a transaction group number.
Those skilled in the art will appreciate that a single DTL may be maintained for the entire storage pool (108), where each entry identifies the particular disk (e.g., 110A, 110N) and when the disk (e.g., 110A, 110N) was offline. In addition, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the DTLs (e.g., 115A, 115N) may be stored in any location in the system (e.g., in the storage pool (108), in memory, etc.). In one embodiment of the invention, the SPA (106) manages the DTL (e.g., 115A, 115N) (i.e., updates the contents of the DTL (e.g., 115A, 115N), etc.).
As noted above, the SPA (106) receives transactions from the DMU (104). More specifically, the I/O management module (200), within the SPA (106), receives transactions from the DMU (104) and groups the transactions into transaction groups, in accordance with one embodiment of the invention. The compression module (201) provides functionality to compress larger logical blocks (i.e., data blocks and indirect blocks) into smaller segments, where a segment is a region of physical disk space. For example, a logical block size of 8 KB may be compressed to a size of 2 KB for efficient storage. Further, in one embodiment of the invention, the encryption module (202) provides various data encryption algorithms. The data encryption algorithms may be used, for example, to prevent unauthorized access. In one embodiment of the invention, the checksum module (203) includes functionality to calculate a checksum for data (i.e., data stored in a data block) and metadata (i.e., data stored in an indirect block) within the storage pool (108). The checksum may be used, for example, to ensure data has not been corrupted.
As discussed above, the SPA (106) provides an interface to the storage pool (108) and manages allocation of storage space within the storage pool (108). More specifically, in one embodiment of the invention, the SPA (106) uses the metaslab allocator (204) to manage the allocation of storage space in the storage pool (108).
In one embodiment of the invention, the storage space in the storage pool (108) is divided into contiguous regions of data, i.e., metaslabs. The metaslabs may in turn be divided into segments (i.e., portions of the metaslab). The segments may all be the same size, or alternatively, may be a range of sizes. The metaslab allocator (204) includes functionality to allocate large or small segments to store data blocks and indirect blocks. In one embodiment of the invention, allocation of the segments within the metaslabs is based on the size of the blocks within the I/O requests. That is, small segments are allocated for small blocks, while large segments are allocated for large blocks. The allocation of segments based on the size of the blocks may allow for more efficient storage of data and metadata in the storage pool (108) by reducing the amount of unused space within a given metaslab. Further, using large segments for large blocks may allow for more efficient access to data (and metadata) by reducing the number of DMU (104) translations and/or reducing the number of I/O operations. In one embodiment of the invention, the metaslab allocator (204) may include a policy that specifies a method to allocate segments.
As noted above, the storage pool (108) is divided into metaslabs, which are further divided into segments. Each of the segments within the metaslab may then be used to store a data block (i.e., data) or an indirect block (i.e., metadata).
In contrast to the root block (300), indirect blocks (302, 304, 306) and data blocks (308, 310, 312, 314) may be located anywhere in the storage pool. In one embodiment of the invention, the root block (300) and each block pointer (302A, 302B, etc.) include data as shown in the expanded diagram of block pointer (302B). One skilled in the art will appreciate that data blocks (308, 310, 312, 314) do not include this information; rather, data blocks (308, 310, 312, 314) contain actual data of files within the file system (e.g., 100 in
In one embodiment of the invention, each block pointer (e.g., 302A, 302B, etc.) includes a metaslab ID (318), an offset (320) within the metaslab, a birth time (322) of the block (i.e., data block or indirect block) referenced by the block pointer, and a checksum (324) of the data stored in the referenced block. In one embodiment of the invention, the metaslab ID (318) and offset (320) are used to determine the location of the referenced block in the storage pool. The metaslab ID (318) identifies a particular metaslab. More specifically, the metaslab ID (318) may identify the particular disk within the storage pool upon which the metaslab resides and the location on the disk where the metaslab begins. The offset (320) may then be used to reference a particular segment within the metaslab. In one embodiment of the invention, the data within the segment referenced by the particular metaslab ID (318) and offset (320) may correspond to either a data block or an indirect block. If the data corresponds to an indirect block, then the metaslab ID (318) and offset (320) within a block pointer in the indirect block are extracted and used to locate a subsequent data block or indirect block. The tree may be traversed in this manner to eventually retrieve a requested data block.
In one embodiment of the invention, copy-on-write transactions are performed for every data write request to a file. Specifically, all write requests cause new segments to be allocated for the modified data. Therefore, the retrieved data blocks and indirect blocks are never overwritten (until a modified version of the data block and indirect block is committed). More specifically, the DMU writes out all the modified data blocks in the tree to unused segments within the storage pool. Subsequently, the DMU writes out the corresponding block pointers (within indirect blocks) to unused segments in the storage pool. In one embodiment of the invention, fields (i.e., metaslab ID, offset, birth, checksum) for the corresponding block pointers are populated by the DMU prior to sending an I/O request to the SPA. The indirect blocks containing the block pointers are typically written one level at a time. To complete the copy-on-write transaction, the SPA issues a single write that atomically changes the root block to reference the indirect blocks referencing the modified data block.
In one embodiment of the invention, the file system metadata (404A, 404N) corresponds to metadata associated with the individual file system. In one embodiment of the invention, the file system metadata (404A, 404N) is organized in a hierarchical tree where the leaf nodes of the file system metadata (404A, 404N) correspond to root nodes (not shown) of the individual files (406A, 406B, 406C, 406D). In one embodiment of the invention, each file is organized in a hierarchical tree structure (see, e.g.,
Turning to
Detailed descriptions of the use of a dirty time log (DTL) for resilvering can be found in copending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/407,773, filed on Apr. 19, 2006 entitled “Method and System for Dirty Time Logging,” copending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/407,744, filed on Apr. 19, 2006 and entitled “Method and System for Dirty Time Log Directed Resilvering,” and copending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/409,427, filed on Apr. 19, 2006 and entitled “Method and System for Pruned Resilvering Using a Dirty Time Log.”
If the root requires resilvering, then the root is subsequently resilvered (ST172). Regardless of whether the root is resilvered, a determination is then made about whether any of the blocks included in the global file system metadata (e.g., 402 in
If one or more blocks included in the global file system metadata require resilvering, then the aforementioned blocks are resilvered, based on their position in the hierarchical tree in which the blocks are organized (ST176). In particular, in one embodiment of the invention, the blocks higher in the hierarchical tree (i.e., blocks closer to the root) are resilvered before the blocks lower in the hierarchical tree (i.e., blocks further away from the root).
Regardless of whether any blocks included in the global file system metadata are resilvered, a determination is then made about whether any of the blocks included in the file system metadata (e.g., 404A, 404N in
If one or more blocks included in the file system metadata require resilvering, then the aforementioned blocks are resilvered, based on their position in the hierarchical tree in which the blocks are organized (ST180). In particular, in one embodiment of the invention, the blocks higher in the hierarchical tree (i.e., blocks closer to the root) are resilvered before the blocks lower in the hierarchical tree (i.e., blocks further away from the root). Those skilled in the art will appreciate that file system metadata (e.g., 404A, 404N) may be resilvered in parallel, sequentially, or any combination thereof.
Regardless of whether any blocks included in the file system metadata are resilvered, a determination is then made about whether any of the blocks included in the files (e.g., 406A, 406B, 406C, 406D) require resilvering (ST182). In one embodiment of the invention, the aforementioned determination may be made using a dirty time log (DTL), as described above, a conventional method for determining whether to resilver a block (e.g., a dirty region log), or any combination thereof.
If one or more blocks included in the files require resilvering, then the aforementioned blocks are resilvered, based on their position in the hierarchical tree in which the blocks are organized (ST184). In particular, in one embodiment of the invention, the blocks higher in the hierarchical tree (i.e., blocks closer to the root) are resilvered before the blocks lower in the hierarchical tree (i.e., blocks further away from the root). Those skilled in the art will appreciate that blocks higher in the hierarchical tree may include metadata, while blocks lower in the hierarchical tree may include data. Further, those skilled in the art will appreciate that blocks included in each file (e.g., 406A, 406B, 406C, 406D) may be resilvered in parallel, sequentially, or any combination thereof.
Once ST182 and/or ST184 are completed, all the metadata and data in the storage pool have been resilvered (i.e., all blocks in the storage pool requiring resilvering have been resilvered). Those skilled in the art will appreciate that because metadata are resilvered before data, the method of
The invention may be implemented on virtually any type of computer regardless of the platform being used. For example, as shown in
Further, those skilled in the art will appreciate that one or more elements of the aforementioned computer system (600) may be located at a remote location and connected to the other elements over a network. Further, the invention may be implemented on a distributed system having a plurality of nodes, where each portion of the invention (e.g., operating system, file system, system call interface, DMU, SPA, storage pool, disk, dirty time log, metaslab allocator, I/O management module, compression module, encryption module, checksum module, root block, data block, indirect block, etc.) may be located on a different node within the distributed system. In one embodiment of the invention, the node corresponds to a computer system. Alternatively, the node may correspond to a processor with associated physical memory. The node may alternatively correspond to a processor with shared memory and/or resources. Further, software instructions to perform embodiments of the invention may be stored on a computer readable medium such as a compact disc (CD), a diskette, a tape, a file, or any other computer readable storage device.
While the invention has been described with respect to a limited number of embodiments, those skilled in the art, having benefit of this disclosure, will appreciate that other embodiments can be devised which do not depart from the scope of the invention as disclosed herein. Accordingly, the scope of the invention should be limited only by the attached claims.
This application claims benefit of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 60/734,023 filed on Nov. 4, 2005, entitled “Dirty Time Logging and Resilvering” in the names of William H. Moore and Jeffrey S. Bonwick. This application is related to copending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/407,773, filed on Apr. 19, 2006 and entitled “Method and System for Dirty Time Logging,” copending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/407,744, filed on Apr. 19, 2006 and entitled “Method and System for Dirty Time Log Directed Resilvering,” and copending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/409,427, filed on Apr. 19, 2006 and entitled “Method and System for Pruned Resilvering Using a Dirty Time Log,” the entire contents of which are incorporated herein by reference. All the above referenced applications are co-owned by the same assignee. The present application contains subject matter that may be related to the subject matter in the following U.S. patent applications, which are all assigned to a common assignee: “Method and Apparatus for Self-Validating Checksums in a File System” (application Ser. No. 10/828,573) filed on Apr. 24, 2004; “Method and Apparatus for Dynamic Striping” (application Ser. No. 10/828,677) filed on Apr. 21, 2004; “Method and Apparatus for Vectored Block-Level Checksum for File System Data Integrity” (application Ser. No. 10/828,715) filed on Apr. 21, 2004; “Method and Apparatus for Identifying Tampering of Data in a File System” (application Ser. No. 10/853,874) filed on May 26, 2004; “Method and System for Detecting and Correcting Data Errors Using Checksums and Replication” (application Ser. No. 10/853,837) filed on May 26, 2004; “Method and System for Detecting and Correcting Data Errors Using Data Permutations” (application Ser. No. 10/853,870) filed on May 26, 2004; “Method and Apparatus for Compressing Data in a File System” (application Ser. No. 10/853,868) filed on May 26, 2004; “Gang Blocks” (application Ser. No. 10/919,878) filed on Aug. 17, 2004; “Method and Apparatus for Enabling Adaptive Endianness” (application Ser. No. 10/919,886) filed on Aug. 17, 2004; and “Automatic Conversion of All-Zero Data Storage Blocks into File Holes” (application Ser. No. 10/853,915) filed on May 26, 2004.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4144522 | Kageyama et al. | Mar 1979 | A |
| 4209845 | Berger et al. | Jun 1980 | A |
| 5129085 | Yamasaki | Jul 1992 | A |
| 5155847 | Kirouac et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
| 5274803 | Dubin et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
| 5371885 | Letwin | Dec 1994 | A |
| 5403639 | Belsan et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
| 5410667 | Belsan et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
| 5675802 | Allen et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
| 5819292 | Hitz et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5953742 | Williams | Sep 1999 | A |
| 6209111 | Kadyk et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6341341 | Grummon et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6536033 | Weerawarana et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
| 6578120 | Crockett et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6704838 | Anderson | Mar 2004 | B2 |
| 6745284 | Lee et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6745305 | McDowell | Jun 2004 | B2 |
| 6795966 | Lim et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
| 6820098 | Ganesh et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
| 6829617 | Sawdon et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
| 6842834 | Crockett et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
| 6857001 | Hitz et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
| 6880051 | Timpanaro-Perrotta | Apr 2005 | B2 |
| 6892211 | Hitz et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
| 6977787 | Ito | Dec 2005 | B2 |
| 6981114 | Wu et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
| 7007196 | Lee et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 7024427 | Bobbitt et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
| 7032154 | Kidorf et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
| 7039661 | Ranade | May 2006 | B1 |
| 7043677 | Li | May 2006 | B1 |
| 7133964 | Rodrigues et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7162486 | Patel et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
| 7174352 | Kleiman et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
| 7197599 | Corrado | Mar 2007 | B2 |
| 7200715 | Kleiman et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
| 7272613 | Sim et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
| 7305579 | Williams | Dec 2007 | B2 |
| 7340572 | Cochran | Mar 2008 | B2 |
| 7340640 | Karr et al. | Mar 2008 | B1 |
| 7373520 | Borthakur et al. | May 2008 | B1 |
| 7389379 | Goel et al. | Jun 2008 | B1 |
| 7389396 | Goel et al. | Jun 2008 | B1 |
| 7392425 | Schoenthal et al. | Jun 2008 | B1 |
| 7395378 | Pendharkar et al. | Jul 2008 | B1 |
| 7467265 | Tawri et al. | Dec 2008 | B1 |
| 7657796 | Kaiser et al. | Feb 2010 | B1 |
| 7669032 | Karr et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
| 7680839 | Krishnamurthy et al. | Mar 2010 | B1 |
| 7689609 | Lango et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 20020004883 | Nguyen et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020055942 | Reynolds | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020087788 | Morris | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020091670 | Hitz et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020161972 | Talagala et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20030033477 | Johnson et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030041211 | Merkey et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030070043 | Merkey | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030084242 | Strange et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030126107 | Yamagami | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030145167 | Tomita | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030158834 | Sawdon et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030170012 | Cochran | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030177322 | Crockett et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030177324 | Timpanaro-Perrotta | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030182313 | Federwisch et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20040024973 | Chron et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040030822 | Rajan et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040098720 | Hooper | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040107314 | Kim et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040123063 | Dalal et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040143713 | Niles et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040225834 | Lu et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040234000 | Page | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040260673 | Hitz et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040268068 | Curran et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050010620 | Silvers et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050097270 | Kleiman et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050144202 | Chen | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050144381 | Corrado | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050235154 | Serret-Avila | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050273654 | Chen et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060085595 | Slater | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060112251 | Karr et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060168409 | Kahn et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060179218 | Burkey | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060184821 | Hitz et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060218135 | Bisson et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060218433 | Williams | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060218644 | Niles et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060256965 | Rowe | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20070094464 | Sharma et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070094465 | Sharma et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070094466 | Sharma et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20080049504 | Kasahara et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| Entry |
|---|
| Johnson, J. E. et al.; “Overview of the Spiralog File System”, Digital Technical Journal, vol. 8, No. 2, 1996, pp. 5-14 (10 pages). |
| Santry, D. S. et al.; “Deciding When to Forget in the Elephant File System”; 17th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP '99), Dec. 1999; pp. 110-123 (14 pages). |
| Chutani, S. et al., “The Episode File System”; Proceedings of the 1992 USENIX Winter Technical Conference; 1992; (18 pages). |
| Seltzer, M.L.; “File System Performance and Transaction Support”; University of California at Berkeley, 1992 (131 pages). |
| Octavian Lascu et al, “Configuration and Tuning GPFS for Digital Media Environments”, Nov. 2005, IBM International Technical Support Organization, p. 38. Available online: http://www.redbooks.ibm/com/redbooks/pdfs/sg246700.pdf. |
| “An Introduction to GPFS v1.3 for Linux”, Jun. 2003. Available online: http://jumpdoc.fz-juelich.de/doc—pdf/gpfs21/GPFs-Linux-wp060303.pdf. |
| Sanjay Ghemawat et al, “The Google File System”, 2003, ACM, p. 3. |
| Austin, B. “A Dynamic Disc Allocation Algorithm Designed to Reduce Fragmentation During File Reloading”, Information Sciences Laboratory, Corporate Research and Development Center, General Electric Company, 4 Pages, 1970. |
| Goodheart, B., Cox, J. “The Magic Garden Explained” Prentice Hall, 8 Pages, 1994. |
| Stallings, W. “Computer Organization and Architecture: Designing for Performance”, Prentice Hall, 4 Pages, 2000. |
| Sandberg, R. et al.; “Design and Implementation of the Sun Network Filesystem”; Sun Microsystems, Inc., 1985 USENIX Conference (12 pages). |
| McKusick, M. K. et al.; “A Fast File System for UNIX”; ACM Transaction on Computer Systems, vol. 2, No. 3, Aug. 1984, pp. 181-197 (17 pages). |
| Astrahan, M.M. et al.; “System R: Relational Approach to Database Management”; ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 1, No. 2, Jun. 1976, pp. 97-137 (41 pages). |
| “VERITAS File System 3.4 Administrator's Guide” VERITAS Software Corporation, Nov. 2000, http://www.veritas.com; pp. 1-227 (227 pages). |
| Czezatke C. et al.; “Linlogfs: A Log-Structured Filesystem for Linux”; The USENIX Association, Proceedings of FREENIX Track: 2000 USENIX Annual Technical Conference, San Diego, California, Jun. 18-23, 2000 (13 pages). |
| Osorio, N. et al.; “Guidelines for Using Snapshot Storage Systems for Oracle Databases”; Oracle Corporation, Oct. 2001 (13 pages). |
| Quinlan, S.; “A Cached WORM File System”; AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murry Hill, New Jersey; Software-Practice and Experience, vol. 21(12), pp. 1289-1299, Dec. 1991 (11 pages). |
| Sun StorEdge Instant Image 2.0 System Administrator's Guide; Sun Microsystems, Inc., Feb. 2000, Revision A (106 pages). |
| Ylonen, T.; “Concurrent Shadow Paging: A New Direction for Database Research”; Laboratory of Information Processing Science, Helsinki University of Technology, SF-02150, Espoo, Finland, 1992 (8 pages). |
| Popek, G. et al.; “The LOCUS Distributed System Architecture”; The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1985 The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (8 pages). |
| Gray, J. et al.; “The Recovery Manager of the System R Database Manager”; Computing Surveys, vol. 13, No. 2, Jun. 1981 (20 pages). |
| Schilling, J.; “Enrwurf und Implementierung eines schnellen Filesystems fur Unix unter besonderer Berucksichtigung der technischen Parameter optischer Speichermedien und multimedialer Anwendungen”; Diplomarbeir Jorg Schilling, eingereicht am May 23, 1991 an der TU Berlin, and English Translation (245 pages). |
| Ylonen, T.; “Concurrent Shadow Paging: Snapshots, Read-Only Transactions, and On-The-Fly Multi-Level Incremental Dumping”; Laboratory of Information Processing Science, Helsinki University of Technology, FIN-02150, Espoo, Finland, 1993 (22 pages). |
| “The Enterprise Challenge Served by Snapshot”; Whitepaper, 2001 LSI Logic Corporation (8 pages). |
| Agrawal, R. et al.; “Integrated Concurrency Control and Recovery Mechanisms: Design and Performance Evaluation”; ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 10, No. 4, Dec. 1985, pp. 529-564 (36 pages). |
| Suresh, Babu S.; “Persistent Snapshots”; Department of Computer Science and Automation, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore—560 012, Jan. 2000 (38 pages). |
| “Proceedings of the 5th Annual Linux Showcase & Conference” USENIX Association, Oakland, California, Nov. 5-10, 2001 (11 pages). |
| Borg, A. et al.; “Fault Tolerance Under UNIX”; ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, vol. 7, No. 1, Feb. 1989, pp. 1-24 (24 pages). |
| Rosenblum, M. et al.; “The Design and Implementation of a Log-Structured File System”; Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences, Computer Science Division, Univeristy of California, 1991 (15 pages). |
| Hecht, M. S. et al.; “Shadowed Management of Free Disk Pages with a Linked List”; ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 8, No. 4, Dec. 1983, pp. 503-514 (12 pages). |
| Rosenblum, M. et al.; “The LFS Storage Manager” Computer Science Division, Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of California; presented at the Summer '90 USENIX Technical Conference, Anaheim, California, Jun. 1990 (16 pages). |
| Lorie, R. A.; “Physical Integrity in a Large Segmented Database”; ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 2, No. 1, Mar. 1977, pp. 91-104 (14 pages). |
| Tsotras et al., “Efficient Management of Time-Evolving Databases”, Aug. 1995, IEEE Transactions of Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 7, pp. 591-608 (18 pages). |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20070106866 A1 | May 2007 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60734023 | Nov 2005 | US |
